470 replies to this topic

[Jin Ma]

FupDup, on 17 April 2014 - 09:01 AM, said:

I don't care if the old K2 barrel was realistic or unrealistic. I only cared that it was SEXY.

i really don't understand realism arguments on how thick a barrel is. its like saying the person wearing bigger glasses they have larger eyes.

Edited by Jin Ma, 17 April 2014 - 09:04 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cimarb, on 17 April 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

This may or may not agree with your OP, Bishop, but hopefully it does.

Weapons should not be dynamically sized. A PPC on a K2 should be the same size as a PPC on a Spider. An AC20 on a hunchback should be the same size as an AC20 on an Atlas and a Locust.

This could be done by making the size determined by crit slots. For instance, a Medium Laser is one crit slot. A Large Laser is two crit slots, so it should be roughly twice the size. A PPC is three crit slots, so it should be three times the size of the medium. An AC20, on the other end, should be roughly ten times the size of a medium laser.

That means an AC20 on a Locust should be HUGE comparative to the mech, it should fill the full hunch on a Hunchback, and it should be a good chunk of the section on an assault, but NOT be a little pee shooter on a Locust, just like it is on the Atlas...

Trust me, I agree.


And honestly, the PPC itself may be fine in the K2.... but if you look at the geometry change, the Bore appears the same. But the original had a MUCH thicker barrel wall, obviously, armored. Hence the beefier look. That kind of visual quirl helps MAKE the mechs in this game. There is a reason that for the most part, the CB Mechs all are wonderfully more interesting visually, and so detailed. Have you looked at the HBK's arms, up close, especially as they flex at start up? THAT was a first class game model.

And the AC20? Base it off the Atlas. The only reason for the AC20 hunch to be so huge on the HBK is that it is armored. Sadly, they won't think it through and do something smart like as a quirk, increase the armor of the HBK Hunch by 50% allowance to compensate. A person still has to make the trade off in something else, AND the rest of the mech is just as fragile as before.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 April 2014 - 09:05 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Jin Ma, on 17 April 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

There is no realism argument.

How thick the barrel looks has nothing to do with the size of the equipment inside. For all we know, thick barrel or not the PPC is the exact same size on the inside

Oh I disagree. You can definitely squeeze more out of a thicker barrel than you can a narrow one.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jin Ma, on 17 April 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

i really don't understand realism arguments on how thick a barrel is. its like saying the person wearing bigger glasses they have larger eyes.

only part that should matter is the MINIMUM size of the package, and the bore diameter and MAYBE Barrel Length. You can get a 30-06 rifle with barrels in all different sizes and thicknesses.

In some instances, one would think the modelers are making more work for themselves on this.

Because THIS

should NEVER happen.

Both mechs pack 2 PPC, anyone catch the slight issue?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 April 2014 - 09:10 AM.

[Jin Ma]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 April 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

only part that should matter is the MINIMUM size of the package, and the bore diameter and MAYBE Barrel Length. You can get a 30-06 rifle with barrels in all different sizes and thicknesses.

In some instances, one would think the modelers are making more work for themselves on this.

Because THIS

should NEVER happen.

Both mechs pack 2 PPC, anyone catch the slight issue?

for those i just pretend they are different PPC size models.

Or if it works like a lazer, the size of the lens may not be indicative of what is going on inside.

Edited by Jin Ma, 17 April 2014 - 09:14 AM.

[Mavairo]

Also can we for the love of god remove the VCRs that hang off the A1, as well as the little clusters that are duct taped to the side of it, when we run multiple launchers?

Tell me what point does it serve to make the ears (which a blind drunk can hit at 1k meters easily from EITHER side of the mech. Ie I can still pop the RIGHT side off the Kitty when the LEFT is what's facing me half the time), even larger on the kitty?

Other than making the catapult look like a travesty given legs.

Real reason they nerfed the K2 and A1s looks: they wanted to sell yet more Cataphracts.

PGI was faced with a problem thanks to the universal hardpoints that we have right now. Did they render PPCs and etc to scale with the mechs, (and they don't even scale well in many cases. Put PPCs on a Battlemaster and you'll see what I mean. Now go look at the 8Q Awesomes model, and even the current pencil ***** K2) or did they fix the hard points to prevent mechs that have no right carrying over sized weapons from looking "stupid".

PGI of course picked the more difficult route. The end result? Mechs that look utterly tragic, with weapons.

Edited by Mavairo, 17 April 2014 - 09:17 AM.

[CeeKay Boques]

As a non K2 driver, I support this call for bigger arm hitboxes.

[Mavairo]

Technoviking, on 17 April 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

As a non K2 driver, I support this call for bigger arm hitboxes.

Not much difference in hitbox there. If you can shoot the new arms you can shoot the old ones. Just a matter of one looking like a sisssy cannon and the other looking like something that could well put the FOG (Fear. Of. God) into a target just by looks alone.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jin Ma, on 17 April 2014 - 09:12 AM, said:

for those i just pretend they are different PPC size models.

Or if it works like a lazer, the size of the lens may not be indicative of what is going on inside.

look long and hard at that Firestarter. That thin ghas 14 tons hanging off it's left elbow. 14 tons out of 35, or over 1/3 it's mass. Yes, technically fitting 2 full sized models on one arm would be impractical (or course...1/3 the mass off on swinging appendage is impractical ) but blame that on PGIs lousy decision not use Sized Hardpoints, which would have obviated the issue before it began.

Technoviking, on 17 April 2014 - 09:40 AM, said:

As a non K2 driver, I support this call for bigger arm hitboxes.

as a K2 driver, by all means, waster your shots on the arms......

(And as a K2 driver, you almost NEVER lost them to begin with, unless a torso was attached.)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 April 2014 - 10:07 AM.

[Equalizer]

Every time I see one my Catapults in the hangar, I can't help it but wonder how PGI even thought it a good idea to change them the way they are now. Even worse, they don't seem to take a hint on how loathsome this change is for some of us - aesthetics could be just as important factor for a mech choice as its actual performance.

That's why I don't like to play my Phoenix mechs for example - sure, Shadowhawks are powerful and all, but I didn't quite like their transition from concept to in-game art. The same applies for Catapults - they used to be perhaps the coolest looking mechs in the game, but now they just look ridiculous, so I've played like 5 games total in any one of them since. The silly looks is what stopped me from getting a Jester at 50% off yesterday, even though I quite like it as layout. I'd rather get the Golden Boy or Pretty Baby instead, even though they're both sorta meh for my taste.

[Trauglodyte]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 April 2014 - 07:43 PM, said:

Seriously. I know we have much bigger balance issues and such.

But can you REALLY tell me it don't bug you? Alex re-designed Symmetrical Chicken Walker Death made to Perfection. The In game Modelers delivered it to the T. If A Giant Stompy Robot could be SEX, it would be the K2.


Perfection. I get misty eyed and weak kneed looking at my old Killer of CB. Are the Barrels oversized? NO! Look at the bores! They obviously have armored sleeves to help protect their 7 ton lightning guns.

And so we get a geometry pass, and lo! Things can only get better! Except.......


PGI giveth. PGI taketh away.

Is anyone else with me about the great injustice done to the once Masterpiece that was the K2? This is like if the restorers of the Sistine Chapel had used spray paint. Neon spray paint.

Thank you for your support.

It is an issue with a lot of the art. It is one of the reasons why I'm glad that they haven't updated the Awesome yet cause I'd hate to see that arm PPC once they get a hold of it.

If you want to see something really funny, though, put an AC20 on your Atlas and then (if you own one) put an AC20 on a Locust. The ridulous size difference between the two frames is laughable. I guess we can be all RP about it and say that it is a different manufacturer and that is why one is smaller than the other. But, if they both fire the same, they should look the same.

Oh, and one more thing for the ART PEOPLE: Fix your damned missile tubes! Tired of having my LRM10 drop down into my torso on my Griffin only to have my Streaks sit on the actual hunch on top of my shoulder. Really?

[Dymlos2003]

Isn't this like the 4th time you've made this thread?

[Trauglodyte]

Dymlos2003, on 17 April 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

Isn't this like the 4th time you've made this thread?

Perseverance through erosion!

[Haakon Magnusson]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 April 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Trust me, I agree.

While on this weapon size discussion, I just wonder what is their (igp) reasoning making miniature PPC/ACs, boggles the mind... I mean, I made that warhammer pic as a joke, but really.. with those tiny PPCs, would it have been as cool? no it would not have. PPC Cat demands justice, if for nothing else than cool looking advertisement material.

I would much appreciate weapons looking more like they actually take their space... comparison with that firestarter / banshee PPC is frikking ridicilous, and that firestarter and spider PPC... well, it is big weapon, some size difference is alright but a PPC SHOULD look big on a light mech, a big hanging ppc on a firestarter is just realistic and a bit cool as well


AH well, I'll continue drinking beer. On another thought, a friend of mine who just got rid of WoT got surprisingly interested while playing MWO with my acco (Ok, sure my fault, I sat him down with 2erL raven...)

I was actually kind of funny looking at someone learning to walk. That legs and torso twist thing had him surprisingly confused couple of games even though I emphasized torso twist / turretish analogy. Then again couple of funny games later he was flying alright with it and being just as bad (or ok?) with it as me Guess I should prod him to make an acco this weekend to get that freebie mech.

[FireSlade]

Trauglodyte, on 17 April 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

Oh, and one more thing for the ART PEOPLE: Fix your damned missile tubes! Tired of having my LRM10 drop down into my torso on my Griffin only to have my Streaks sit on the actual hunch on top of my shoulder. Really?

Sell all of your SSRMs and LRM10s, then buy new ones placing them into the areas that you want them in and they should stay. It is a glitch with the location hidden value not updating and instead keeping the values that they were given when they first were purchased so they try to go back to that spot.

[Deathlike]

Trauglodyte, on 17 April 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

It is an issue with a lot of the art. It is one of the reasons why I'm glad that they haven't updated the Awesome yet cause I'd hate to see that arm PPC once they get a hold of it.

That might be the day you'll see the Pretty Baby cry...

[Haakon Magnusson]

FireSlade, on 17 April 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

Sell all of your SSRMs and LRM10s, then buy new ones placing them into the areas that you want them in and they should stay. It is a glitch with the location hidden value not updating and instead keeping the values that they were given when they first were purchased so they try to go back to that spot.

WTF lol, really... all systems nominal

[Bishop Steiner]

FireSlade, on 17 April 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

Sell all of your SSRMs and LRM10s, then buy new ones placing them into the areas that you want them in and they should stay. It is a glitch with the location hidden value not updating and instead keeping the values that they were given when they first were purchased so they try to go back to that spot.

yeah, but it's absolutely IDIOTIC to have to do that.

[CeeKay Boques]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 April 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

as a K2 driver, by all means, waster your shots on the arms......

(And as a K2 driver, you almost NEVER lost them to begin with, unless a torso was attached.)

Wait, so now you want big arm shields? I knew it wasn't just aesthetics!!

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 17 April 2014 - 11:51 AM, said:

That might be the day you'll see the Pretty Baby cry...

that really will be itty bitty PPC nipples.....

behold the new "Improved" Geometry Awesome, now with Lightning Gun Jubblies!

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 April 2014 - 12:16 PM.