59 replies to this topic

[Shazarad]

I have to say I agree Bishop (as usual). The scale for PPCs on other mechs that never had PPCs is completely wrong.

I want my firestarter to have a big ass barrel that takes up almost its entire arm when I mount a PPC, not a tiny little port.

I mean really, when you take a PPC mounted on an Awesome, take that same exact scale, and put it on a Firestarter, it really should be this huge cantankerous gun.

I never liked the K2 ever but I do agree that the new smaller barrels are garbage and should be replaced by big macho barrels. Because ladies like it thicker and longer, or so I'm told.

EDIT: If/when they add the Panther, I can only imagine what the scale for its classic PPC arm cannon will be.

EDIT2: Also ballistic weapon barrels on the Thunderbolt are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too tiny. Gauss rifles aren't teeny tiny things that latch onto arms like that. There's a reason why the Highlander's arm is designed the way it is.

Edited by Shazarad, 17 April 2014 - 10:46 PM.

[Wolfways]

There's a reason why the Hollander looks the way it does.
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hollander

[Dymlos2003]

You know they weapons could just not change at all. Therefore people would shut up about this non issue

Edited by Dymlos2003, 17 April 2014 - 10:48 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

AUSwarrior24, on 17 April 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

There's no solution unless you ditch free full customization, and that's not going to happen, is it? I don't think, realistically, that Firestarter is going to carry three PPCs on one arm with the size from the Awesome.

pretty sure it ain't going to do so regardless as that's 21 tons.

Dymlos2003, on 17 April 2014 - 10:48 PM, said:

You know they weapons could just not change at all. Therefore people would shut up about this non issue

or you could shut up, since by the amount of traffic generated, obviously a fair chunk of people disagree with you.

[RedDragon]

AUSwarrior24, on 17 April 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

There's no solution unless you ditch free full customization,

Man, that would be cool.

[Demuder]

AUSwarrior24, on 17 April 2014 - 10:35 PM, said:

There's no solution unless you ditch free full customization, and that's not going to happen, is it?

It's tragically funny how many problems would have been avoided in the first place if they didn't go the full customization route in the first place. Even Clan mechs would be easy to balance.

[TELEFORCE]

I think the trade-offs for free customization are worth it. I hated MW4 so much for those limits as it made it hard to build some canon configs I enjoyed as well as custom configurations I've used for tabletop 'mechs.

In other words, I want to put 3 PPCs on my Jenner and I will enjoy it!

[Bishop Steiner]

TELEFORCE, on 18 April 2014 - 04:32 AM, said:

I think the trade-offs for free customization are worth it. I hated MW4 so much for those limits as it made it hard to build some canon configs I enjoyed as well as custom configurations I've used for tabletop 'mechs.

In other words, I want to put 3 PPCs on my Jenner and I will enjoy it!

The problem is their tradeoffs..... they decide to artificially enforce sped caps, which when combined with open customization, literally destroys the viability of many stock builds, like the Panther or the Wolfhound, when there are already mechs in the game like the Jenner or Firestarter that literally does anything they could do, BETTER. With Sized Hardpoints are are viable again, and while yes, you don't get PPCs on your Jenner, you do on the Panther or WLF-1...

Can't be all things for all people, but MW3 multiplayer was largely ruined by open customization. It was literally, determine the best hitboxes, then max it out, thus you ended up with about 4 chassis being used. (Of course, the game was clumsy enough, that Lights were kinda toast anyhow)

[Thunder Lips Express]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 April 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

weapon geometry standardization at it's finest.

Hey look!!! They both got 2 PPCs!!!!!
(yeah and of course, PPCs are such a large weapon that Omnimechs CANNOT mount a hand actuator if they mount one. Food for thought.)

oh snap! i didn't realize how big the difference was in size of ppc's for lights...thats silly

[Demuder]

TELEFORCE, on 18 April 2014 - 04:32 AM, said:

I think the trade-offs for free customization are worth it. I hated MW4 so much for those limits as it made it hard to build some canon configs I enjoyed as well as custom configurations I've used for tabletop 'mechs.

In other words, I want to put 3 PPCs on my Jenner and I will enjoy it!

I agree, full customization is certainly attractive and interesting, but also it comes with so many cans of worms that it would take a very competent team to actually balance it. PGI's best effort so far, was ghost heat.

On the other hand, given the state the game is now and for the past two years, that is, a simple deathmatch, it is good that Jenners can carry two PPCs. Otherwise there would be nothing for them to do.

[Bishop Steiner]

dimstog, on 18 April 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

I agree, full customization is certainly attractive and interesting, but also it comes with so many cans of worms that it would take a very competent team to actually balance it. PGI's best effort so far, was ghost heat.

On the other hand, given the state the game is now and for the past two years, that is, a simple deathmatch, it is good that Jenners can carry two PPCs. Otherwise there would be nothing for them to do.

Odd, since most of the best member pilots are packing 4-6 medium lasers..... Something that could do with sized hard points

[Demuder]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 April 2014 - 10:52 AM, said:

Odd, since most of the best member pilots are packing 4-6 medium lasers..... Something that could do with sized hard points

Heh, I was just refering to the example in TELEFORCE's post.

PPC Ravens and Cicadas are not that uncommon though, or the odd AC/20 Raven. I won't even go on about heavier chassis since I don't want to get entangled in yet another "boating" vs "skillz" vs "twitch" vs "pinpoint" vs "poptart" vs "noobz" vs "pugz" vs "lurmaggedon" vs "adapt or die" forum war.

[Lyoto Machida]

dimstog, on 18 April 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

I agree, full customization is certainly attractive and interesting, but also it comes with so many cans of worms that it would take a very competent team to actually balance it. PGI's best effort so far, was ghost heat.

On the other hand, given the state the game is now and for the past two years, that is, a simple deathmatch, it is good that Jenners can carry two PPCs. Otherwise there would be nothing for them to do.

[Antagonist]

Crunk Prime, on 17 April 2014 - 08:08 PM, said:

Firestarter can also shove a micro AC/20 into its chest. A gun so large the Hunchback was built with a giant hunch on one shoulder to house it.

Do I even want to see a pic of that particular abomination?

[Demuder]

Lyoto Machida, on 18 April 2014 - 01:14 PM, said:

Uhm, I love the .gif, however I don't understand if it is directed at me or "PGI's best effort".

Upon re-reading, maybe it came out wrong, I meant that the most effort PGI has ever put into balancing was ghost heat, not that it was a "good" -or even sane- change. Probably it was their "best" effort in their minds.

[Mavairo]

Just imagine the horrors they will inflict on the Dragon since they seem to want to go to Tiny Weapons.

[Shazarad]

Mavairo, on 18 April 2014 - 02:08 PM, said:

Just imagine the horrors they will inflict on the Dragon since they seem to want to go to Tiny Weapons.

I can tell you right now that the Ultra 5 barrel on the 5N will be replaced by the minigun barrels they prefer now. Which sucks because I actually like how the barrel looks on the Dragon currently.

I do hope the gauss rifle barrel will look nice though.

[Mavairo]

Shazarad, on 18 April 2014 - 04:22 PM, said:

I can tell you right now that the Ultra 5 barrel on the 5N will be replaced by the minigun barrels they prefer now. Which sucks because I actually like how the barrel looks on the Dragon currently.

I do hope the gauss rifle barrel will look nice though.

Yeah replacing the Ultra barrel will be stupid.

PGI are you getting the hint yet? Quit ruining the mechs!
the Flame's barrel looks mighty stupid too now that I think on it. Must have been a precursor to all of this mess...

Edited by Mavairo, 18 April 2014 - 04:33 PM.

[Jonathan Paine]

What do you expect from the creative minds that put two twenty pipe missile launchers on a Raven - yet the Atlas gets a ten pipe.

Though I guess anything that keeps them from adding more invincible rubble to maps is a good thing...

[Bishop Steiner]

Jonathan Paine, on 21 April 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

What do you expect from the creative minds that put two twenty pipe missile launchers on a Raven - yet the Atlas gets a ten pipe.

Though I guess anything that keeps them from adding more invincible rubble to maps is a good thing...

yeah...never fully got that. I know the stock had a 5 tube system, but later units should be able to use a full 20, especially since it actually does make a difference in game play, as opposed to in TT